Attachments L1 - 4 Flashcards
Attachment:
An affectional tie that one person or animal forms between himself and another specific one, binding them together in space and over time
Indicative behaviours of an attachment:
1) Seeking proximity
2) Distress on separation
3) Joy on reunion
4) General orientation towards each other
Infancy:
Period of a child’s life before speech begins (1st/2nd yr)
2 main types of caregiver-infant interactions:
1) Reciprocity
2) Interactional synchrony
Reciprocity:
An interaction where each person responds to the other and elicits a response from them
What did Feldman and Eidelman (2007) research show?
Mothers typically pick up on and respond to infant alertness around 2/3 of the time
What is infant alertness?
Babies have periodic ‘alert phases’ and signal they are ready for interaction
From around how many months does this interaction become increasingly frequent, what does it involve and who researched this?
- Around 3 months
- Close attention to each other’s verbal signals and facial expressions
- Feldman 2007
Give an example of a reciprocated interaction
A baby smiles and their caregiver also smiles
What research demonstrated reciprocity and how did it do this?
Research in 1970s showed infants to coordinate their actions w/ caregivers, as if they were taking turns
What did Brazelton et al (1975) describe this reciprocity as and why?
As a dance as each person responds to each other’s moves
What did Brazelton (1979) suggest?
- Basic rhythm is an important precursor to later communications
- Regularity of an infant’s signals allows caregiver to anticipate their behaviour
- Sensitivity to infant behaviour is foundation for later attachment between them
Interactional synchrony:
- Temporal coordination of micro-level social behaviour
- Reflection of what the other is doing
Who investigated interactional synchrony?
Meltzoff and Moore (1977)
Procedure of Meltzoff and Moore (1977) study:
Controlled observation of infants’ behaviour:
1) Adult model displayed 4 diff stimuli (3 diff faces + hand gesture) where fingers move in a sequence
2) Dummy placed in infant’s mouth to prevent response during display
3) Dummy removed after display w/ child’s expression filmed on vid
4) Observers watched videotapes of infant’s behaviour in real time, slow motion and frame by frame if needed
5) Then judged by independent observers who had no knowledge of what infant had seen
6) Had to record behaviour under categories of mouth protrusion, termination of mouth protrusion, tongue protrusion and termination of tongue protrusion
7) Each observer scored tapes twice (to calculate intra and inter-observer reliability)
Findings of Meltzoff and Moore study:
- Association between infant behaviour and adult model’s behaviour
- All scores of both the intra-observer and inter-observer reliability were greater than 0.92
- Infants as young as 2 or 3 weeks imitated special facial gestures
What results were found in a later study following Meltzoff and Moore and what conclusion can be made from this?
- Same synchrony was shown w/ infants only 3 days old
- Interactional synchrony is likely to be innate rather (inborn) than learned
Give one study evaluating interactional synchrony:
- Piaget (1962)
- Argued infants cannot imitate intentionally and are rather doing pseudo-imitation
- True imitation only happens after the child was a year old
Pseudo-imitation:
Copying because there’s a reward
Explain features of each behavioural category in Meltzoff and Moore study:
- Mouth protrusion: Abrupt jaw drop
- Termination of mouth protrusion: Return of mouth to closed resting position
- Tongue protrusion: Forward thrust
- Termination of tongue protrusion: Retraction of tip of tongue
What study supported Meltzoff and Moore’s study?
Murray and Trevarthen (1985)
Procedure of Murray and Trevarthen (1985) study:
- 2 month old infants interacted via video monitor w/ mother in real time
- Video monitor played tape of mother so that image on screen was not responding to infants’ facial and bodily gestures
Results and conclusion of Murray and Trevaethen (1985) study:
- Acute distress
- Turned away, showing infant is eliciting a response rather than doing it for a reward (disproving pseudo-imitation)
Strengths and weaknesses of caregiver-infant interactions through reciprocity and interactional synchrony:
+ Value of research
- Problems with testing infant behaviour
- Conflicting research evidence
- Is behaviour intentional or just imitation?
- Individual differences